Heeheeheeheehee. Atta Boy, Steve!
Posted by Julie at September 11, 2007 09:47 PMPresident John F. Kennedy had promised that we would "pay any price, bear any burden . . . to assure the survival and the success of liberty,"
This "Democratic Party", Steve? Or the "Come home, America." version of Senator George McGovern? That's diametrically the opposite of the Kennedy years. Eleven short years from the Kennedy hope to the McGovern despair. HC said a while back that she was wondering where the 'real' Democratic Party had gone. It's not with those people that call themselves 'Democrats' today. They are the Democrats in name only crowd.
The Kennedy Democratic Party was a place I could have been comfortable with. I'm sorry folks, this Democratic Party of today, the DINO's in the room, I can't feel any comfort with.
Posted by peter at September 11, 2007 10:00 PMWelcome Steve! (Reality sucks but at least it answers all those questions and takes away the feeling of craziness.)
Posted by Marie at September 11, 2007 10:10 PMYeah, sometimes the "old" me crawls out from under the "must protect the party" suit that I wear way too much.
Posted by Steve Soto at September 11, 2007 10:22 PMSteve, the "old" you is also very funny. If we can't change the world or the Democratic Party, might as well have fun with it.
Posted by Marie at September 11, 2007 10:32 PMAmen Marie, amen.
Posted by Steve Soto at September 11, 2007 10:42 PMLyndon Johnson would have people like Rove for breakfast before he started his day.
Posted by Judith at September 12, 2007 12:22 AMI have a whole lotta respect for old Barry Goldwater for his statement about 'extremism in defense of liberty' quote. In US politics, moderation should never be the starting point We've seen what 40 years of that has done to the party and the country.
After reading you for years, Steve, this side of you doesn't surprise me. I was startled, yes, to read "the urge to punch this miserable son of a bitch in the face", but I certainly know the anger myself about the mewlings of mealy mouthed munchkins of the mothridden meritocracy.
If you ever do punch one of them, I'll raise the bail to spring ya, assuming you'd do the same vice-versa.
I will be shifting to 'Independent' solely to protest the national party's refusal to fight. And as an Indie, I may choose to vote left of the Dems or not vote at all. More importantly, I'll try to persuade others to avoid the moderate Dem lesser-of-evils trap.
Schumer, Emanuel, Reid and Pelosi ain't cutting it. Reducing the party's rolls remains one of the viable ways to get their attention, though punching them sounds way more fun.
Posted by Kevin Hayden at September 12, 2007 01:29 AMMy hope is that the White House would seek some kind of candidate who would be broadly acceptable.”
Not that his unacceptability will keep Schumer from voting to confirm him.
The president must have his choice of traitors to help him destroy the Constitution, and god forbid that the Senate should act like a co-equal and responsible branch of government and stand in his way.
Besides, someone might call Schumer and Reid names.
The statement is not really all that bad. Will Schumer vote for Olsen? Probably but we knew that. What would have been the difference if he had made a fiery denunciation and then backed out? That would have made you more upset.
Posted by Daryl at September 12, 2007 04:19 AMThese are para's people. It does make you want to throw up.
Posted by JohnT at September 12, 2007 05:28 AMSpeaker Botox is still screeching about how we need a "new direction in Iraq" (yeah, Nance, samething you said last year) and Step-in-Fetchit Reid is whispering about "reaching across the aisle to find consensus with Republicans on Iraq." (yeah, Harry - yawn.)
The Democratic majority still behave like the minority party. They're clueless.
Posted by Christopher at September 12, 2007 05:39 AMYeah princess sparkle's been saying the same thing so long we might as well just record it and hit play ever day. Cut down on global warming or something.
She continues her attempt at duping Democrats.
Posted by peter at September 12, 2007 06:00 AMThe problem is not so much that Schumer whines when Bush does things he doesn't like, it's that he then votes for the very things he whines about because he doesn't have the guts to actually fight back.
Posted by Walldon at September 12, 2007 06:11 AMWill the Dems even deamnd an independent counsel for the US Attorney scandal as the "price" for getting their (third) irresponsible Repub hack AG?
Posted by euzoius at September 12, 2007 06:35 AMIndependent counsel? Hmmm I'll see what my friends across the aisle have to say about that.
If it's OK, I'll write an extra stern letter to the Commander in Chief himself. Yeah! That's the ticket. Ooh! I'm getting a woodie just thinking about it!
Posted by Pat Leahy at September 12, 2007 06:59 AM"...mewlings of mealy mouthed munchkins of the mothridden meritocracy."
Channeling Spirow Agnew, Kevin?
Steve, after the Democrats allow themselves to get tagged with "the Dems lost the war" meme the Publicans will be pushing big time starting 1-21-2009, we'll likely need to create a new Liberal Party to replace the Democratic Party. It will be just like what happened to the Liberal Party in the UK after WW1 when they had whole-heartedly supported the war and the British upper-class and the average British working man learned first hand their total incompetence in the killing fields in France and decided that Labor was more to their liking. Hell, the German Socialist Party still hasn't recovered from voting in favor of the Kaiser's policies starting WW1 and finding out they had just picked up a tar baby which they couldn't shake until after Hitler had burned it off them.
Posted by PrahaPartizan at September 12, 2007 07:53 AMWould this be the same Charles "Eek" Schumer who was "hoodwinked" (!!!) on two, count'em, two extremists he personally ass-patted onto the Supreme Court?
Posted by Ellie at September 12, 2007 08:36 AMthe problem isn't what Schumer said, it's what he didn't say
he said: "Clearly if you made a list of consensus nominees, Olson wouldn’t appear on that list," said Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who led the Judiciary Committee effort to remove Mr. Gonzales. "My hope is that the White House would seek some kind of candidate who would be broadly acceptable.”
THEN he should have said: "If the White House refuses to nominate a candidate who would be broadly acceptable then I will lead the FILIBUSTER against the nominee."
pants pissing peter should understand the ReThug's motto: someone else will pay any price, someone else will bear any burden
Posted by Gay Veteran at September 12, 2007 09:29 AMtotally agree with you steve. and yeah i wish i was 20-30 years younger too, i'd help ya set up that new Party
i have to say i think the democrats are really the worst opposition party EVER.
and the clintons and the DLC have a good share in this evisceration too, don't forget that.
Well said, Steve.
Posted by Copeland at September 12, 2007 10:16 PM